Hi! Just wanted to start the next page. 
Yes, yes…I’m here, and keeping up when work allows (they picked a damned inconvenient time to unload a couple new dumptrucks of work on me). Anyway…
Something I just noticed through the whole bit of amrussell’s mason claim and there not being any negating claims…I just looked over the rule sheets again, and noticed this bit: “Omega Wolf: When investigated, appears as a Freemason on the Town Side”.
Now I’m not certain if “investigated” refers to the secret mason handshake or not, so I suppose this is a mod question:
Do masons see the Omega Wolf as a fellow mason?
No. Freemasons are the only ones who can detect an Omega Wolf. Seers and Witches will be fooled.
In answer, I will quote myself from post 616, well before you even started this whole crusade:
I will also say again (for probably the third time now) that I think sachertorte should reveal everything he knows. I will say again that I find it suspicious that he won’t explain himself. But maybe he knows something I don’t. Maybe I’m missing something that would make it less advantageous for him to reveal. I’m not omniscient and it’s a complicated game. I just don’t see the harm in waiting. If he’s lying, he’s going to get something wrong eventually. Meanwhile we view him with suspicion and trust nothing.
Idle’s point is that if sach is lying, he stands a far better chance of getting lucky and guessing right if he only reveals sides, not roles.
I think the point is that he shouldn’t give the actual role if it is beneficial to scum. Knowing for sure that certain other Town roles aren’t in play is a scum advantage. I wouldn’t object to a yes/no on Freemason, but, then, if sach is concealing something for cause then it would really only confirm that. This way, I imagine, keeps everyone guessing. Frankly, Idle, the way that you’re pushing this, would you be satisfied with a simple yes or no without the reason? How would that change your agenda that sach is possible scum?
Yes, but it doesn’t answer my two objections: first, why would sach pick a role so easy to confirm as a role-claim and, second, where is the coroner if not him?
Sorry, I can’t let this go. In my travels across the board today I noticed you were posting in a couple of football threads that I read (good posts, btw 
). Then I noticed that you started a Pit thread (about work, no less) today.
I don’t mean to stalk you and I’m not interested in meta-gaming, but you are the one who is bringing up how busy you are at work. If you have time to post in several other threads and start a Pit thread, you have time to post here, IMO. You are lurking, and your behavior is anti-town.
FOS Hal Briston
I did, look in the vote you quoted.
BTW, your vote for sachetorte pretty much removes my lingering doubt. 
Granted, it is difficult to keep up with this thread. I would think other threads would be less demanding/more escapist. This thread is almost work in itself, even if you are keeping up with each post. I do think it’s important that we all make an effort to post, though. It throws off the game if we’re suspecting people of not posting for nefarious reasons if it turns out they’re busy.
FTR, this is a poor reason to vote for anyone. Catching up in mafia takes a significant amount of reading, normally much more than any other thread on the board, and also takes a significant amount of time to make a substantial post. This, I think, is a Red Herring and is a Null Tell.
However, since I’m disinclined to look at all, I can’t make a judgment on this aspect, but I would say that a significant number of posts being made could demonstrate this, or simply that he’s not in a mindset to play mafia at the time.
Thus, as I’ve said before, I consider it, at worst, poor form to post, because you’re simply not playing. Lurking is a deliberate act of making few posts, and making little impact, which could be indicative of something; meanwhile, simply not posting could mean any number of things, very few of which are related to the game.
I would think it a bit unfair for people who don’t really feel like reading up at the moment, or only have a few minutes, to be afraid to do a quick check in another thread they’re following because they might be labeled a lurker.
Or he tells us if amrussell is a Freemason or not we can avoid the waiting game.
He’s not giving all of his info out so how will we know if it’s correct or not? He’s only giving out half the info.
I disagree. I don’t see how hard it would be to easily guess or deduce that amrussell was Town if one believed his claim.
And as for Fretful, it could be a lucky guess. Someone said earlier there’s probably about 40 percent scum in this game being as how all the pro-goodies have power roles. I don’t think it’d be hard to take a shot at a guess because if one gets it right, they’re all of pretty confirmed, I’d think, to most. That’s what it seems like I’m reading.
Exactly, so I think this and the fourth one (sach being a Vampire) are the least likely. But if he was a Cabalist, he has a pretty good sporting chance.
Why wait? Why not just have him say if the player was a Freemason? Then we’d know 1 is probably it automatically (once Pleonast reveals the roles).
I don’t see anyone wanting him lynched. I see people wanting to know why he’s not telling us the full info and putting pressure on to give it. There should be no reason why he wouldn’t.
But he could end it all now. Why do we wait? You don’t find him not telling as weird when there IS NO reason not to reveal?
Bolding mine.
No, there’s isn’t. I cannot see anything there would be either. So that makes two of us who can’t think of anything. There IS nothing. Go through the options in your own mind and think about it for a bit. There IS nothing. No reason to keep the info to yourself unless you don’t know the info.
Well we’re in agreement then. Because the bolded is all I’m asking for and sach:
A. Refused to do this in his last post.
B. Hasn’t posted since.
You don’t think this is suspicious? I mean suspicious enough to warrant a looking at right now when it could easily be put to rest in one post and NOT waited on until who knows when?
How many times do I have to say this? YES! It was MY idea, in case you forgot.
Frankly, I think getting the ROLE right or not is a bit more convincing then just getting the SIDE right.
Because all it takes is ONE good guess (which, as I said above, maybe not too far a shot) and most will put more confidence in you. I feel in order to not be misled, it should be required, at LEAST ONCE, to give a role…or to at least say IF one was or was not a role, which is all I’m asking.
Idle, what is your opinion on the following statement: It is in the town’s interest to lynch sachetorte.
If your answer is “Yes, it is a good idea”, then I want to see your rebuttal to my reasoning.
If your answer is “No, it is a bad idea”, then I want to know why the hell you’re voting for him.
It seems to me that, considering the possible high percentage of scum (already mentioned at least twice that I can recall) that we damn well shouldn’t be voting for anyone that we don’t want to swing, or at the very least, we shouldn’t be putting multiple “pressure votes” on people. That Drain Bead and Idle Thoughts are doing so (anyone else? Hang on while I check the vote count), okay Rysto, too, is not good.
Other suspicions for those three: Idle Thoughts for the mass role claim suggestion. I think, although I can’t be sure, that the same suggestion was dealt with in the Firefly game before he suggested it here, but I haven’t had time to look for it yet.
Drain Bead for me-tooing her vote for sachertorte. Just the fact that the vote went on so quickly and with none of her own support.
Rysto for the two minutes between (paraphrased) “we don’t need to pressure sach for the info” and “Cough it up, sach.” with a vote.
Of the three, Drain Bead bothers me the most, so
vote Drain Bead
if I have time to reread the thread tonight, I may change my vote to Idle, Rysto or a completely different person.
I’m not saying that they’re wrong to request sach to reveal the role. I’ve said previously that he should either reveal or give an explanation for not revealing, but in this game, multiple pressure votes are not good for the Town.
My thoughts (almost) exactly, but I’m feeling the scummy scum vibe mostly from **Idle ** and Rysto. Idle, for being like a dog with a ham bone over Sachertorte. I do think it’s weird for **Sach ** to keep that info to himself. Very weird. However, I am not willing to risk lynching him if he is telling the truth. The truth will come out and I am willing to wait a little bit. Rysto, for his about face post.
I am satisfied now that **Hal ** is catching up.
Unvote Hal Briston
Vote Idle Thoughts
So wait. I’m pretty sure I was the first to actually vote for sachertorte, then Idle unvotes Rysto to vote for sachertorte, then Rysto completely changes sides and votes for sachertorte…but Kat votes for me because my vote was the “me, too”? Am I reading that correctly?
EBWOP: The first today to vote for sachertorte, that is. I was on vacation for the vast majority of Day 1 and didn’t have time to make substantial posts, seeing as I was making them from my iPod.
Clearly I need to make my thinking more clear when I post. My first post was meant to say “We don’t need to pressure sach toDay because the point is moot until the end of Day 3, when we get role information from Pleonast.” I immediately realized that wasn’t true, because sach could use the information from toDay’s lynch to form a better guess at Roles on Day 3. Therefore, I changed my mind and decided that sach needs to provide that information now.
Did you miss the part where Idle had several posts outlining his suspicions against sach before you or he voted? I don’t think you did, because your reasons for voting sach was:
I’ll also point out that I called out both Idle and Rysto. I just am, overall, getting more of a scummy feeling from the context of your vote than theirs.
Right now? No, I don’t think so.
But I am very suspicious of him and if he’s refusing to reveal info for no reason at all, then yeah, I’m going to vote for him until he does, because there is no reason to keep the info under the rug. Thus the vote is on him for pressure. If he cannot say if amr is a Freemason or not, then the only reason I know of is that he doesn’t KNOW if amr is a Freemason or not.
You and everyone has yet to say a reason to keep the info a secret. There IS no reason.
And where are you seeing a vote count? I looked all over, even in Pleo’s sig.
Sorry, but you’re wrong. I was not suggesting it. I was asking “what would make this not work?/is there a reason this wouldn’t work?” It was answered: “There could be more than one of the same role” and I was enlightened.
I was not suggesting it. Please go back and quote the post where I was suggesting it. I can quote YOU (in the post I bring it up in) saying that I’m NOT suggesting it…but I can’t seem to find a post where I’m suggesting it. So therefore, why are you putting that on a list of “other suspicious behavior” of me?
It’s false.
I don’t see how not. I’m of the opinion that he may NOT be Town…in that case, it IS good for Town.
Yeah, as you see above, you’re not the only one she got wrong.
Fine. Substitute “idea” for “suggestion”.